Posted: Apr 14, 2010 8:05 am
Ah, the old divide and conquer tactic, eh? Good work.
No, those papers that are supportive of other models cannot be dismissed just because they don't support RNA-world. Abiogenesis is an active area of research, and all hypotheses are supported to some degree. All the papers stand as evidence for the various steps in the various hypotheses. There is not one single hypothesis, and nor should there be, until or unless it can be shown that only one mechanism for the arisal of life from abiotic roots is possible. Those papers still constitute a single body of evidence for abiogenesis, much as you'd love to reduce it for your own dogmatic purposes.
No, those papers that are supportive of other models cannot be dismissed just because they don't support RNA-world. Abiogenesis is an active area of research, and all hypotheses are supported to some degree. All the papers stand as evidence for the various steps in the various hypotheses. There is not one single hypothesis, and nor should there be, until or unless it can be shown that only one mechanism for the arisal of life from abiotic roots is possible. Those papers still constitute a single body of evidence for abiogenesis, much as you'd love to reduce it for your own dogmatic purposes.